Judges kindly rate each parameter based on the given scale of rating

a) Innovation & creativity

• 1 (Low) : Nothing new, solution exists in the market
• 2 (Could be better) : Based on existing solutions, but builds upon it/ incremental/ new features
• 3 (Good) : Similar solution exists in other industries but new to the industry/theme it has been suggested for
• 4 (Impressive) : Completely new solution
• 5 (Outstanding) : Disruptive solution

b) Business Impact & Market Potential

• 1 (Low) : Has limited or no market potential
• 2 (Could be better) : Has some market potential but adoption may be an issue
• 3 (Good) : Has some market potential, but has high competition (Red Ocean)
• 4 (Impressive) : Has untapped market potential but has low entry barriers
• 5 (Outstanding) : Untapped market potential with negligible competition (Blue Ocean)

c) Design & UI

• 1 (Low) : Not intuitive, boring design
• 2 (Could be better) : Decent design elements but lacks intuitiveness
• 3 (Good) : Attractive design and somewhat intuitive
• 4 (Impressive) : Easy to understand, contemporay design, very user friendly
• 5 (Outstanding) : Uses latest design principles and UX

d) Implementation

• 1 (Low) : Hardly any functionalities
• 2 (Could be better) : Some functionalities but doesn’t bring out the concept/idea completely
• 3 (Good) : Good minimum viable product
• 4 (Impressive) : well thought out functionalities with intuitive implementation
• 5 (Outstanding) : An App worthy of showcasing to customers!

d) Technical Competence

• 1 (Low) : Commodity tech and regular implementation. Not adhering to any coding standards
• 2 (Could be better) : Some exploration done to use tech innovatively but lacks implementation, Some coding standards followed.
• 3 (Good) : Good choice of technologies and usage. Minimum coding standards followed throughout.
• 4 (Impressive) : At least 1 emerging tech used and implemented in a way novel to the judges. Very good code quality with comments, reusability and modularity
• 5 (Outstanding) : Multiple new and emerging tech used and excellent implementation. No issues found in Code Quality

e) Pitch

• 1 (Low) : PPT/video does not explain the idea.
• 2 (Could be better) : Artefacts communicate the idea but more detail is needed.
• 3 (Good) : Both idea and app demo showcased and understandable.
• 4 (Impressive) : Well thought out content in demo video and presentation. Well articulated and easy to understand.
• 5 (Outstanding) : Presence of demo video, presentations, and more artefacts and all of them of high quality.

f) Use of Design Thinking principles

• 1 (Low) : None or only one of the attributes are met.
• 2 (Could be better) : Only 3-4 of the attribute criterions are met.
• 3 (Good) : 5-6 of the attributes are considered in the solutions.
• 4 (Impressive) : 80% of the attributes are covered
• 5 (Outstanding) : 100% of the attributes mentioned in are met